Here's an un-boxing video I did yesterday when I received the package. Possibly one of the most boring or weird unboxing videos you'll see. I had to mute the audio since their were people talking in the background and I never once talked in the video.

I shot it wit the Panasonic GH2 and 20mm lens. The ISO was very high because the lighting in the room is not perfect.

It really wasn't an easy choice getting between the X900 and AC90 but after playing with the AC90 a bit, I'm a little bit more comfortable over my purchase. It has ton of well needed features that I wanted in an ENG type camera including independent rings, fully native 24p, 60p, 2 SD card slots, 2 XLR inputs (even though I own a Zoom H4), etc. It's also better suited for my tripod because of it's heavier body. I do wish the AC90 was a little smaller though.

I'll be posting comparison footage between the SD600 and the AC90 at a later date. It would be even better to do put it against the X900 but I don't own one. In the future, I can always meet up with someone. I wanted to do something similar a while ago but I got myself very busy at that time.

Congrats on the AC90. It will be interesting to learn about the sorts of shooting situations where AC90's footage look superior to your SD600. I still think the LX7's landscape footage when played at 360p on Youtube looks brighter and clearer than any camcorder footage I have seen but, of course, the AC90 will beat it in terms of smoothness and lack of moire.

It's a Sachtler FSB4. Sachtler is a very expensive name brand and the FSB4 is their second cheapest model which can be had for $861. Their cheapest is the Ace for $535 which is just as smooth as the FSB4 but slightly cheaper parts. After I made the video, I actually did have a feeling that it almost looks like I'm showing off the tripod as well. You can only imagine how awkward it looks with my SD600 on it. With the AC90, it looks more like a perfect match now.

It's a Sachtler FSB4. Sachtler is a very expensive name brand and the FSB4 is their second cheapest model which can be had for $861. Their cheapest is the Ace for $535 which is just as smooth as the FSB4 but slightly cheaper parts. After I made the video, I actually did have a feeling that it almost looks like I'm showing off the tripod as well. You can only imagine how awkward it looks with my SD600 on it. With the AC90, it looks more like a perfect match now.

Thanks. I want a good tripod and keep looking for something magic in the lower priced category. Perhaps I won't ever find it!

Now when you have the SD600 and the AC90 could you do a sensitivity test? Set both to max wide, 0 gain and say 1/60 @ 720p60 and shoot some dim stuff, no need for exact numbers. Whichever is brighter, close diaphragm until it looks about the same as another one (levels can be checked in an editing app). Then you can do the same but instead add gain on the dimmer one. Should be about the same (6dB == 1 stop), but I am also curious about noise. If the AC90 is say 2 stops slower, but at 24dB looks as good as the SD600 at 12dB, then they can be considered the same quality-wise.

The camera looks very sexy, which is unusual for Panasonic. But a sensor is a bit small. What did you buy it for? I sold my HMC40 about a month ago, did not use it for more than a year.

I sometimes shoot events just for fun and I also do paid video work sometimes. The first job this camera might get would be for a music video. Yes low light tests is one of the biggest things I want to do. Yes, full wide at f/1.5 is how I'll do it. I did some testing already but I'll have to think of something to shoot in the house to put online.

This was meant to be something simple and I think the AC90 might have been a bit too close to the figure. I went closer because it has a wider lens but I might have went too close. I'll do another comparison in the future and this time manual white balance to see what kind of results it'll get this time. Read the description of the video for even more info about this particular comparison.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rUC62oEWgU

I'll upload some native samples to Vimeo when I have the time.

Anyway, as you can see, when it comes to the high gain settings, you can't really compare it to the exact numbers. 30db limit on the AC90 looks a little cleaner than the 18dB limit on the SD600 and as for 0dB when shooting in low light, the AC90 is much clearer.

I've seen different specs for the chips on Panasonic sites. For example 2.1 in one place and 2.6 in another place. In DVXuser, a poster is saying that the 1/4.7 number is actually the effective video portion. If you were to look at the specs of consumer 3MOS camcorders, you'd see that the effective video portion is smaller than 1/4.1. I would need more info on that to be sure that Panasonic is really using the effective size for the AC90.

One very nice thing about the gain control is not only are you able to adjust it in one one of the rings but it uses increments of 1 so that you can be very precise on how exposed you want your image to be. That's probably why it goes up to 30. I do wish their was an ND switch but that's a whole nother story.

Thanks. I want a good tripod and keep looking for something magic in the lower priced category. Perhaps I won't ever find it!
Bill

Hi Bill S. - the best value-for-money fluid head tripod, in my view, is the $110 Fancier version of the $120 Ravelli AVTP Professional. All metal construction, crutch-style legs, 75mm bowl, dual-handled head. Comes with two Manfrotto compatible plates. I have one of these and am about to buy another.

I'll be posting comparison footage between the SD600 and the AC90 at a later date.

I for one would be grateful if you could post some outdoor landscape footage (original .mts files) from the AC90 to Vimeo ( like you did in the past with your SD600) so that others can download the file and work with it. Although in recent days I expressed my dissatisfaction with the brightness, sharpness and colors of Panasonic camcorder footage as compared to still image camera footage, last night I imported some camcorder footage (downloaded from Vimeo) into a movie editing program and discovered it could be brightened, sharpened and the colors adjusted to look alot like still camera footage. So I might end up being interested in purchasing the AC90 if I find I can edit the footage to produce a look that suits my taste. Thanks.

Those posts repeat this guy's confusion, posted over and over, that somehow sharpness and color vary depending on whether the subject is close (interviews) or far (landscape) . Landscape, with small details, is very revealing of resolution capability. What tests a cameras resolution is subjects in motion, however, so static shots of landscapes are not a good test. The fact is the TM900/X900 are the sharpest cameras/camcorders available (more than the GH2 and GH3), and I assume that the AC90 will be so also, based on preliminary use reports by pros.

The top resolution chart on that page is for the GH3 at its default setting. You can see the artifacts (ghosts) produced by over-sharpening. Then below it is the same camera/lens chart shot with in-camera sharpening turned down - much more natural, and basically the same resolution. Artificial sharpening does not improve resolution.

So sharpening a video in post can produce some nasty looking - unnatural - footage.

Those posts repeat this guy's confusion, posted over and over, that somehow sharpness and color vary depending on whether the subject is close (interviews) or far (landscape) . Landscape, with small details, is very revealing of resolution capability. What tests a cameras resolution is subjects in motion, however, so static shots of landscapes are not a good test. The fact is the TM900/X900 are the sharpest cameras/camcorders available (more than the GH2 and GH3), and I assume that the AC90 will be so also, based on preliminary use reports by pros.

Mark, some of us are interested in a videocamera that can resolve small static details in a landscape; like being able to read the writing on a traffic sign that is way off in the distance. Even though the GH3 may oversharpen by default, it may also help enable one to read a distant traffic sign despite the artifacts. Everyone has different priorities when it comes to video image quality. For some, the technical correctness of the moving video image may be most important (smoothness, lack of moire and alaising). Others are interested in the ultimate resolving capability of static or nearly static subjects in a landscape, even if it also comes at the expense of some image defects.

Just some low light shooting in Boston. My original plan was to get 60p clips in good lighting but the freaking rain messed up my plans so I ended up getting to Boston much later. I've been very busy since I've gotten the camera and today was the first day I'd have time to shoot outside with it. It was shot in 24p and it's best to read the description to get the rest of the settings I used or why I shot the scenes a certain way.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lHcaH1dG44

Looks and sounds really good for such a low light situation even when played at 360p. Hope you get a chance to shoot some sunny weather footage someday and to hear how you think the overall outdoor image quality compares to your SD600.

Maybe I'll be doing some shooting Sunday. Not sure about tomorrow since I don't know when I'll get home from work and the last thing I need is Déjà Vu. I was completely free today and it just had to rain. I'm the moderator of the 1080 50p and 60p group on Vimeo and the last time I posted a video to that group was a year ago so outdoor shooting to put online is something I was already planning to do once I get the time.

You should have set shutter to 1/30, this should have helped with lights blinking. Also, 1/24 at 0 gain is like 1/48 (normal for 24p) at 6dB, and it is not bright enough yet. I guess 18dB would have looked better, considering that the camera holds high gain quite well.

Yes the gain could have been higher in the beginning. It was sort of a test to see how much your able to see without putting on any gain. I'll be doing some shooting during Christmas Eve in which I'll be using the proper gain at night since it wouldn't be right to do those kind of tests on events. As for the shutter speed being 24, that's sort of a catch 22 situation. On the one hand, it matches up the frame rate but on the other hand, a shutter of 30 is half of the lights. For sure if you shoot it in 30p with a shutter of 30, that would have been a different story. Knowing that I might be doing a bit of movement, I might actually choose to shoot in 30p for the low light scenes. We'll see. 30p is another feature lacking from the X900.

Here's a new video while fooling around with the camera in Boston.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlXkBvFpSIM
It was a little cloudy in some parts such as the ice skating and if only the sun wasn't facing me although the camera didn't do bad controlling the auto white balance during the ice skating parts. Auto White balance was used throughout the whole piece just to see how it turns out just like my night time video.

I hope to have both videos on Vimeo today so people can download it. The Vimeo version of the day footage one is "smart rendered" so you can see exactly how it looks coming off the camera. I exported it to 8Mbps for the YouTube version so basically the one you'll download off Vimeo will look much sharper.

Just some random video which is more showing off my editing than the camera itself. Basically It was shot in 1080 60p and I put it into a 720 24p timeline. The reason is because as you can see, I zoomed in a bit and you don't see any apparent lost of resolution that way. The slow motion sequence is 10% of real time speed. I was almost thinks about not zooming in since the effect might have looked a lot cooler but I decided to keep it this way.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8dQsfF4rL4
You'd have to watch the whole thing to see what I mean. It's actually more toward the end.

You can always download a free trial of Premiere Pro CS6 just to try it out for a month and fool around as much as you can. I'm able to do a ton of different effects in Premiere Pro and it still doesn't have some of the things After Effects has. You can download a free trial of After Effects as well. Theirs always the Creative Cloud for $50 a month. It allows you to download every single Professional Adobe product but it's still a little steep. It's $30 for up-graders of CS5 or students. People should try to see if they quality for the $30 service before they spend the $50. Yes even $30 seams a bit much but with all the things you can do, Adobe still feels they are entitled to charge a kidney. Still, people can get their money back by using it for work and that's if the extra features are really needed.

Anyway, CS5 is still incredible so if you can find a copy of that for a good price, that would also be good.